↓ Skip to main content

Oral Modeling of an Adenovirus-Based Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine in Ferrets and Mice

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Diseases and Therapy, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Oral Modeling of an Adenovirus-Based Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine in Ferrets and Mice
Published in
Infectious Diseases and Therapy, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40121-016-0108-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ciaran D. Scallan, Jonathan D. Lindbloom, Sean N. Tucker

Abstract

Oral vaccines delivered as tablets offer a number of advantages over traditional parenteral-based vaccines including the ease of delivery, lack of needles, no need for trained medical personnel, and the ability to formulate into temperature-stable tablets. We have been evaluating an oral vaccine platform based on recombinant adenoviral vectors for the purpose of creating a prophylactic vaccine to prevent influenza, and have demonstrated vaccine efficacy in animal models and substantial immunogenicity in humans. These studies have evaluated monovalent vaccines to date. To protect against the major circulating A and B influenza strains, a multivalent influenza vaccine will be required. In this study, the immunogenicity of orally delivered monovalent, bivalent, trivalent, and quadrivalent vaccines was tested in ferrets and mice. The various vaccine combinations were tested by blending monovalent recombinant adenovirus vaccines, each expressing hemagglutinin from a single strain. Human tablet delivery was modeled in animals by oral gavage in mice and by endoscopic delivery in ferrets. We demonstrated minimal interference between the various vaccine vectors when used in combination and that the oral quadrivalent vaccine compared favorably to an approved trivalent inactivated vaccine. The quadrivalent vaccine presented here produced immune responses that we predict should be capable of providing protection against multiple influenza strains, and the platform should have applications to other multivalent vaccines. Vaxart, Inc.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 20 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 6 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 19%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,451,892
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#528
of 691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,303
of 300,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.